Re: Add sub-transaction overflow status in pg_stat_activity
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com>,
"Bossart,
Nathan" <bossartn@amazon.com>,
Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>,
Ashutosh Sharma <ashu.coek88@gmail.com>,
Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>,
PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2022-11-14T15:41:29Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: > In short, I think this is a good idea, and if somebody thinks that we > should solve the underlying problem instead, I'd like to hear what > people think a realistic solution might be. Because to me, it looks > like we're refusing to commit a patch that probably took an hour to > write because with 10 years of engineering effort we could *maybe* fix > the root cause. Maybe the original patch took an hour to write, but it's sure been bikeshedded to death :-(. I was complaining about the total amount of attention spent more than the patch itself. The patch of record seems to be v4 from 2022-01-13, which was failing in cfbot at last report but presumably could be fixed easily. The proposed documentation's grammar is pretty shaky, but I don't see much else wrong in a quick eyeball scan. regards, tom lane
Commits
-
Fix comment that was missing a word.
- eb60eb08a95e 16.0 landed
-
Expose some information about backend subxact status.
- 10ea0f924a27 16.0 landed